Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
— Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
WTF? He has no eyebrows!!! Seraphim ♥ 18:09, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sceptre. Hope you're well, and a happy new year to you! I've declined the G10 for the above. It's hot ground, and there are some statements that need to be removed due to lack of referencing, but it's not a G10 in my book. Pedro : Chat 22:09, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Heh. Only seven? Gwen Gale ( talk) 01:36, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
(Outdenting) Good and bad are moral judgements. When I hear the words terrorist or freedom fighter, I reach for my copy of L'Avventura. Gwen Gale ( talk) 04:47, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
What business do you have reviewing blocks? You're not an administrator. — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 01:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Can you please provide an exact quote from guidelines for external links that shows the edit I made does not meet these requirements? Codepro ( talk) 05:50, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I completely disagree. The Scripps Research Institute is not a remedy or a service. The first external link goes to an open source project called Autodock. The second external link points to the research project at The Scripps Research Institute that uses Autodock to conduct basic research for Aids. If what you are saying is true then the Wikipedia page for The Scripps Research Institute should be removed along with all links to open source projects throughout Wikipedia including the link to the source code what runs this very website. Codepro ( talk) 06:05, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
The project is basic research, it offers no medical advice. Codepro ( talk) 06:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey there- I just wanted to drop by and thank you for the vandalism revision you did on my talk page. It's greatly appreciated!! :) ~ Pip 2 andahalf 06:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I don' think [2] is vandalism. The IP is trying to upload a file. The Ip doesn't know he/she needs to first upload it on Wikipedia. Kensplanet T C 13:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I hope that you've had the opportunity to read the rewrite I did of this article. • Freechild 'sup? 05:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the GA Review. Just an update - I responded to your point from the GA Review, and shortened the Plot summary subsection by 200 words as you recommended. Cirt ( talk) 14:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Following up the recent AN thread, do you have a subpage for IPs to leave messages? If you are leaving warnings for IP users, you ought have a way for them to contact you. – xeno ( talk) 19:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding User:Promethean/No to your user or talk page to make your position clear to people who visit your page :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l» (talk) 07:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
What, my article revision was not vandalism as per your beliefs. In my honest opinion, isolated incidents should not be on the US human rights page, lest we list human rights violations that had nothing to do with the Government —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockstone35 ( talk • contribs) 15:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm keen to improve this article to, hopefully, GA level. Given your experience with improving other TV articles, I'd appreciate it if you could have a look and give me some suggestions for changes and additions I should make. I'm not asking for a full peer review, but more some informal advice on the most effective improvements that I can make. -- Deadly∀ssassin 21:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I refer to your revert of my edit on the Matt Smith's page. I took it out as its a page about Matt Smith, not about the catalogue of actors who competed against him for the role, most of which are rumour and have never been officially confirmed as ever even being asked to audition. The article so far is to top heavy with irrelevant information not really pertaining to the *actor* himself. Mmm commentaries ( talk) 02:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip! Springnuts ( talk) 17:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
-- Dravecky ( talk) 09:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
-- Dravecky ( talk) 09:27, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
In the interests of making this a little more interesting by fostering friendly competition:
Mwahaha! I have moved to the lead in our group. Can you catch up? I think not!
=P
Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 20:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I created an RfC to try to deal with that bit about the IDW series' relevancy, to try to drive the discussion out of the edit history. TheGreenFaerae ( talk) 20:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Why do you feel the need to attack OM every single freaking time you see him? Sceptre, I like you - but dang, this is getting ooooold. KillerChihuahua ?!? 23:06, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, think about this a bit: from my perspective, you're the one poking the bear this time. You cannot simultaneously hope OM becomes more civil, and also harass him virtually every time his name appears. So leave him alone, ok? KillerChihuahua ?!? 14:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
If you feel the timing of the AfD was in poor taste, I would've liked to have seen that brought to my Talk page prior to straight up closing the AfD. As I stated in my response to David Shankbone's vote, this is the first time I have seen the article. I left a comment in the talk page as well, mainly discussing how there is never going to be a time when a discussion of anything Bush related is going to go without being "heated" or "pointy". I am especially disappointed that it was closed so rapidly given the arguments I had put together, considering the primary "Keep" comment made more than one accusation of my own intentions behind the AfD, even after I had made the exact points he argued against in the article's talk page. -- TRTX T / C 17:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your participation in
my recent RfA, which failed with 90/38/3; whether you supported, opposed or remained neutral.
Special thanks go out to Moreschi, Dougweller and Frank for nominating me, and I will try to take everyone's comments on board. Thanks again for your participation. I am currently concentrating my efforts on the Wikification WikiProject. It's fun! Please visit the project and wikify a few articles to help clear the backlog. If you can recruit some more participants, then even better. Apologies if you don't like RfA thankspam, this message was delivered by a bot which can't tell whether you want it or not. Feel free to remove it. Itsmejudith ( talk), 22:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC) |
Denbot ( talk) 22:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Did you see this by Erik Moeller, saying that "at least two-thirds" majority would be necessary for it to be switched on [4]? There's also the issue of the discussion page about flagged revisions having a big box at the top with a statement from Jimbo dismissing opposers as being motivated by "FUD", which may have tainted the debate so far. DuncanHill ( talk) 15:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I really wish you hadn't done that. This is the first time SINCE blp I believe he's done anything major and unilateral. Sigh. rootology ( C)( T) 16:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
[5] A, AB, ABC, ABCD. Thoughts there on that page? If the FR is a flop, I'll be the first to ask you to tell me "told you so". rootology ( C)( T) 00:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed your Matt Smith article on the GAn list, and I remembered this link, perhaps it can help you. Have a nice day.-- Music 26/ 11 14:38, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
If you have time, would you care to comment on my suggested Trial 13: Three month trial of all BLPs + flagged protection? Basically, would FlaggedRevs on BLPs and individually selected articles be ok? -- Apoc2400 ( talk) 22:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, are you available to do a userpage redesign for me? I'm just looking for something simple, basically just reformat or rearrangement, whatever you think is good. OlEnglish ( talk) 21:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey Sceptre. Would you mind leaving the image here alone for now? If the article is deleted, the image will be deleted, and so the image issue will become moot (pun slightly intended). If it's not deleted, we can deal with the image then. You're approaching edit-war territory, and I think disengaging would be a good course of action. As a side note, do you want your talk page fully move protected? seresin ( ¡? ) 08:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I left an e-mail conversation hanging; it's been hectic over here. I would have said this through e-mail as it was, but Google is being a piece of shit right now. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 05:59 3 February, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Doctor Who Star Wars.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Please read what it says even in our own article on the British Isles. That move smacks of ignorance... it is clearly an outdated and offensive term and there was no objection to its previous title. You can't just come along and decide a certain phrase "sounds better"... that's blatant POV pushing... --➨♀♂ Candlewicke S T # :) 05:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by J Milburn, on behalf of the judges. 20:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Could you also possibly extend your warning to Yamanam for his disruptive edits? By the way, you have a very impressive user page...and you're only 17!!!! Chesdovi ( talk) 15:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Hello! I am working on an objective alternate to notability in my userspace. Please read User:A Nobody/Inclusion guidelines and offer any suggestions on its talk page, which I will consider for revision purposes. If you do not do so, no worries, but if you wish to help, it is appreciated. Best, -- A Nobody My talk 01:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Okay I will look into this but in the meantime have you been able to find any reception, or critical coverage of any of his performances/acting work in any secondary sources? Again, I find it extremely difficult to believe that none exists out there and in fact think there must be a bunch. Cirt ( talk) 18:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Large is good. Don't think that the bad examples, set by some, of just adding {{ subst:afd top}} and a single word, are the standard to follow. Closing rationales that explain one's reasoning, and how the closure was arrived at, are exactly what prevent things from going to Deletion Review, in practice. People generally understand if a discussion closer explains the closure, which heads off most of the subsequent discussion before it even begins. (At least one closing administrator's talk page is a lengthy series of "Please explain your closure." requests from a large number of editors across a wide range of closures.) Showing one's working is just as good a practice for a closer as it is for the participants. Uncle G ( talk) 15:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
I've opened a merge discussion at the above-mentioned location. Please consider participating if you are interested. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello Sceptre,
The reason i removed the wording aout Dawkins and Ward is because it is a bit excessive underneath Dawkins picture and the same information is listed in the casting paragraph to the left of the photo.
Regards
msa1701 ( talk) 07:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Really wish you hadn't non-admin closed that AFD ... the articles are generally horrible, and should be deleted. There's no way for that view to ever prevail if people keep speedy closing the AFDs as "keep", despite that fact that Bulbasaur, at least, fails WP:N dramatically. I haven't even bothered to look at the others recently. They might have been improved, but I seriously doubt it.— Kww( talk) 01:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 02:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Sorry I'm not on at all; I'm having a medication adjustment and it's not going well. When I'm down I'm not on the computer, and when I'm up I make myself so busy that I can't get to the computer. :( It will pass, though. Have a good 18th. :) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 05:44 3 March, 2009 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have previously posted at a Ireland naming related discussion. Per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names#Back-up procedure, a procedure has been developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration, and the project is now taking statements. Before creating or replying to a statement please consider the statement process, the problems and current statements. GnevinAWB ( talk) 18:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Please do not keep deleting the Tales of the Black Freighter article which I created. I am aware that there is not much on the page but other users can add to it, and make it a much longer and better article. However, this cannot be done if you keep deleting it, so please do not. I am not trying to be rude but I think that people should at least be able to expand it.
And by the way I know that this may be a little late but I dids not vandalise the [[BBFC]'s page last year like you accused me of. Instead I had only just started editing Wikipedia and did not know how to use it very well, which is why my edits may have looked bad. The Editor 155 ( talk) 19:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
A reminder that the Manchester meetup is this Saturday. Hope to see you there! Majorly talk 18:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I've left a message on the Black Freighter article talk page. Basically, the article only needs to cover the DVD, because Zach Synder made it a separate element from his movie, while in the original story its more of a motif than a separate story (plus the comic article deals with it comprehensively, so the section about the comic is just an unnecessary duplication of content). WesleyDodds ( talk) 05:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rfadost.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
There was no consensus for the move you just made and pretty clear consensus against it. As soon as i figure out how to revert, I will. Bali ultimate ( talk) 13:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
I have requested a topic ban on your involvement in Obama-related articles in the light of your violations of the current article probation regime in force. Please see the discussion at WP:AN/I#Disruptive conduct by Sceptre. -- ChrisO ( talk) 19:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
No, not offering any - requesting some! I know you've done a vast amount of work on our fiction-related Wikipedia articles, and I was hoping for some generic pointers. I'm partway through my rewrite of Frasier (done the cast section so far) and what I'm struggling a little bit with are the synopsis and some of the available sources. I ultimately want Frasier up at FA standard, so I actually went and bought the official companion guide. I was hoping you could offer some advice on a) how much/whether the synopsis needs to be referenced b) how much it is possible to rely on an official guide - does it count as a primary source, do I need to find more tertiary sources? Basically, I need some pointers on what works best from the point of view of writing about fiction, and any advice you can offer would be greatly appreciated. Best wishes Fritzpoll ( talk) 20:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Thank you for closing all of the "controversies" pages which had been listed at AFD and I largely agree with your decision. However, out of all of the pot shots which were taken, the Michael Moore controversies page actually had a reasonable debate growing and may have passed or failed its AFD. Is it possible to undo a non-admin closure to let this AFD ride through the process (I'd co-nom, if that is necessary) or should we wait a week and I'll relist it at that time? Thanks. JRP ( talk) 13:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I should make the point it's 3021, T.A. :P Sceptre ( talk) 12:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I highly encourage you to revert your edit purporting to close the AfD for Criticism of George W. Bush. JustGettingItRight ( talk) 15:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Non-administrators may close a nomination as "speedy keep" if there is no doubt that such action is appropriate. Otherwise, non-admins are encouraged to recommend a "speedy keep" in the body of the discussion, and allow an administrator to take the decision.
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
— Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
WTF? He has no eyebrows!!! Seraphim ♥ 18:09, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Sceptre. Hope you're well, and a happy new year to you! I've declined the G10 for the above. It's hot ground, and there are some statements that need to be removed due to lack of referencing, but it's not a G10 in my book. Pedro : Chat 22:09, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Heh. Only seven? Gwen Gale ( talk) 01:36, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
(Outdenting) Good and bad are moral judgements. When I hear the words terrorist or freedom fighter, I reach for my copy of L'Avventura. Gwen Gale ( talk) 04:47, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
What business do you have reviewing blocks? You're not an administrator. — Mythdon ( talk • contribs) 01:44, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Can you please provide an exact quote from guidelines for external links that shows the edit I made does not meet these requirements? Codepro ( talk) 05:50, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I completely disagree. The Scripps Research Institute is not a remedy or a service. The first external link goes to an open source project called Autodock. The second external link points to the research project at The Scripps Research Institute that uses Autodock to conduct basic research for Aids. If what you are saying is true then the Wikipedia page for The Scripps Research Institute should be removed along with all links to open source projects throughout Wikipedia including the link to the source code what runs this very website. Codepro ( talk) 06:05, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
The project is basic research, it offers no medical advice. Codepro ( talk) 06:12, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey there- I just wanted to drop by and thank you for the vandalism revision you did on my talk page. It's greatly appreciated!! :) ~ Pip 2 andahalf 06:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I don' think [2] is vandalism. The IP is trying to upload a file. The Ip doesn't know he/she needs to first upload it on Wikipedia. Kensplanet T C 13:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I hope that you've had the opportunity to read the rewrite I did of this article. • Freechild 'sup? 05:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the GA Review. Just an update - I responded to your point from the GA Review, and shortened the Plot summary subsection by 200 words as you recommended. Cirt ( talk) 14:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Following up the recent AN thread, do you have a subpage for IPs to leave messages? If you are leaving warnings for IP users, you ought have a way for them to contact you. – xeno ( talk) 19:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding User:Promethean/No to your user or talk page to make your position clear to people who visit your page :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l» (talk) 07:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
What, my article revision was not vandalism as per your beliefs. In my honest opinion, isolated incidents should not be on the US human rights page, lest we list human rights violations that had nothing to do with the Government —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockstone35 ( talk • contribs) 15:11, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm keen to improve this article to, hopefully, GA level. Given your experience with improving other TV articles, I'd appreciate it if you could have a look and give me some suggestions for changes and additions I should make. I'm not asking for a full peer review, but more some informal advice on the most effective improvements that I can make. -- Deadly∀ssassin 21:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
I refer to your revert of my edit on the Matt Smith's page. I took it out as its a page about Matt Smith, not about the catalogue of actors who competed against him for the role, most of which are rumour and have never been officially confirmed as ever even being asked to audition. The article so far is to top heavy with irrelevant information not really pertaining to the *actor* himself. Mmm commentaries ( talk) 02:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip! Springnuts ( talk) 17:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
-- Dravecky ( talk) 09:25, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
-- Dravecky ( talk) 09:27, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
In the interests of making this a little more interesting by fostering friendly competition:
Mwahaha! I have moved to the lead in our group. Can you catch up? I think not!
=P
Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 20:01, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I created an RfC to try to deal with that bit about the IDW series' relevancy, to try to drive the discussion out of the edit history. TheGreenFaerae ( talk) 20:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Why do you feel the need to attack OM every single freaking time you see him? Sceptre, I like you - but dang, this is getting ooooold. KillerChihuahua ?!? 23:06, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, think about this a bit: from my perspective, you're the one poking the bear this time. You cannot simultaneously hope OM becomes more civil, and also harass him virtually every time his name appears. So leave him alone, ok? KillerChihuahua ?!? 14:29, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
If you feel the timing of the AfD was in poor taste, I would've liked to have seen that brought to my Talk page prior to straight up closing the AfD. As I stated in my response to David Shankbone's vote, this is the first time I have seen the article. I left a comment in the talk page as well, mainly discussing how there is never going to be a time when a discussion of anything Bush related is going to go without being "heated" or "pointy". I am especially disappointed that it was closed so rapidly given the arguments I had put together, considering the primary "Keep" comment made more than one accusation of my own intentions behind the AfD, even after I had made the exact points he argued against in the article's talk page. -- TRTX T / C 17:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your participation in
my recent RfA, which failed with 90/38/3; whether you supported, opposed or remained neutral.
Special thanks go out to Moreschi, Dougweller and Frank for nominating me, and I will try to take everyone's comments on board. Thanks again for your participation. I am currently concentrating my efforts on the Wikification WikiProject. It's fun! Please visit the project and wikify a few articles to help clear the backlog. If you can recruit some more participants, then even better. Apologies if you don't like RfA thankspam, this message was delivered by a bot which can't tell whether you want it or not. Feel free to remove it. Itsmejudith ( talk), 22:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC) |
Denbot ( talk) 22:53, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
Did you see this by Erik Moeller, saying that "at least two-thirds" majority would be necessary for it to be switched on [4]? There's also the issue of the discussion page about flagged revisions having a big box at the top with a statement from Jimbo dismissing opposers as being motivated by "FUD", which may have tainted the debate so far. DuncanHill ( talk) 15:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
I really wish you hadn't done that. This is the first time SINCE blp I believe he's done anything major and unilateral. Sigh. rootology ( C)( T) 16:09, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
[5] A, AB, ABC, ABCD. Thoughts there on that page? If the FR is a flop, I'll be the first to ask you to tell me "told you so". rootology ( C)( T) 00:18, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed your Matt Smith article on the GAn list, and I remembered this link, perhaps it can help you. Have a nice day.-- Music 26/ 11 14:38, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
If you have time, would you care to comment on my suggested Trial 13: Three month trial of all BLPs + flagged protection? Basically, would FlaggedRevs on BLPs and individually selected articles be ok? -- Apoc2400 ( talk) 22:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, are you available to do a userpage redesign for me? I'm just looking for something simple, basically just reformat or rearrangement, whatever you think is good. OlEnglish ( talk) 21:14, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey Sceptre. Would you mind leaving the image here alone for now? If the article is deleted, the image will be deleted, and so the image issue will become moot (pun slightly intended). If it's not deleted, we can deal with the image then. You're approaching edit-war territory, and I think disengaging would be a good course of action. As a side note, do you want your talk page fully move protected? seresin ( ¡? ) 08:03, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry if I left an e-mail conversation hanging; it's been hectic over here. I would have said this through e-mail as it was, but Google is being a piece of shit right now. — $PЯINGεrαgђ 05:59 3 February, 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Doctor Who Star Wars.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:06, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Please read what it says even in our own article on the British Isles. That move smacks of ignorance... it is clearly an outdated and offensive term and there was no objection to its previous title. You can't just come along and decide a certain phrase "sounds better"... that's blatant POV pushing... --➨♀♂ Candlewicke S T # :) 05:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered by J Milburn, on behalf of the judges. 20:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Could you also possibly extend your warning to Yamanam for his disruptive edits? By the way, you have a very impressive user page...and you're only 17!!!! Chesdovi ( talk) 15:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Hello! I am working on an objective alternate to notability in my userspace. Please read User:A Nobody/Inclusion guidelines and offer any suggestions on its talk page, which I will consider for revision purposes. If you do not do so, no worries, but if you wish to help, it is appreciated. Best, -- A Nobody My talk 01:50, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Okay I will look into this but in the meantime have you been able to find any reception, or critical coverage of any of his performances/acting work in any secondary sources? Again, I find it extremely difficult to believe that none exists out there and in fact think there must be a bunch. Cirt ( talk) 18:59, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Large is good. Don't think that the bad examples, set by some, of just adding {{ subst:afd top}} and a single word, are the standard to follow. Closing rationales that explain one's reasoning, and how the closure was arrived at, are exactly what prevent things from going to Deletion Review, in practice. People generally understand if a discussion closer explains the closure, which heads off most of the subsequent discussion before it even begins. (At least one closing administrator's talk page is a lengthy series of "Please explain your closure." requests from a large number of editors across a wide range of closures.) Showing one's working is just as good a practice for a closer as it is for the participants. Uncle G ( talk) 15:54, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
I've opened a merge discussion at the above-mentioned location. Please consider participating if you are interested. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 20:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello Sceptre,
The reason i removed the wording aout Dawkins and Ward is because it is a bit excessive underneath Dawkins picture and the same information is listed in the casting paragraph to the left of the photo.
Regards
msa1701 ( talk) 07:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Really wish you hadn't non-admin closed that AFD ... the articles are generally horrible, and should be deleted. There's no way for that view to ever prevail if people keep speedy closing the AFDs as "keep", despite that fact that Bulbasaur, at least, fails WP:N dramatically. I haven't even bothered to look at the others recently. They might have been improved, but I seriously doubt it.— Kww( talk) 01:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MZMcBride/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tiptoety talk 02:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Sorry I'm not on at all; I'm having a medication adjustment and it's not going well. When I'm down I'm not on the computer, and when I'm up I make myself so busy that I can't get to the computer. :( It will pass, though. Have a good 18th. :) — $PЯINGεrαgђ 05:44 3 March, 2009 (UTC)
You are receiving this message because you have previously posted at a Ireland naming related discussion. Per Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ireland article names#Back-up procedure, a procedure has been developed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Ireland Collaboration, and the project is now taking statements. Before creating or replying to a statement please consider the statement process, the problems and current statements. GnevinAWB ( talk) 18:21, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Please do not keep deleting the Tales of the Black Freighter article which I created. I am aware that there is not much on the page but other users can add to it, and make it a much longer and better article. However, this cannot be done if you keep deleting it, so please do not. I am not trying to be rude but I think that people should at least be able to expand it.
And by the way I know that this may be a little late but I dids not vandalise the [[BBFC]'s page last year like you accused me of. Instead I had only just started editing Wikipedia and did not know how to use it very well, which is why my edits may have looked bad. The Editor 155 ( talk) 19:09, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
A reminder that the Manchester meetup is this Saturday. Hope to see you there! Majorly talk 18:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I've left a message on the Black Freighter article talk page. Basically, the article only needs to cover the DVD, because Zach Synder made it a separate element from his movie, while in the original story its more of a motif than a separate story (plus the comic article deals with it comprehensively, so the section about the comic is just an unnecessary duplication of content). WesleyDodds ( talk) 05:23, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Rfadost.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 05:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
There was no consensus for the move you just made and pretty clear consensus against it. As soon as i figure out how to revert, I will. Bali ultimate ( talk) 13:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
I have requested a topic ban on your involvement in Obama-related articles in the light of your violations of the current article probation regime in force. Please see the discussion at WP:AN/I#Disruptive conduct by Sceptre. -- ChrisO ( talk) 19:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
No, not offering any - requesting some! I know you've done a vast amount of work on our fiction-related Wikipedia articles, and I was hoping for some generic pointers. I'm partway through my rewrite of Frasier (done the cast section so far) and what I'm struggling a little bit with are the synopsis and some of the available sources. I ultimately want Frasier up at FA standard, so I actually went and bought the official companion guide. I was hoping you could offer some advice on a) how much/whether the synopsis needs to be referenced b) how much it is possible to rely on an official guide - does it count as a primary source, do I need to find more tertiary sources? Basically, I need some pointers on what works best from the point of view of writing about fiction, and any advice you can offer would be greatly appreciated. Best wishes Fritzpoll ( talk) 20:55, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Thank you for closing all of the "controversies" pages which had been listed at AFD and I largely agree with your decision. However, out of all of the pot shots which were taken, the Michael Moore controversies page actually had a reasonable debate growing and may have passed or failed its AFD. Is it possible to undo a non-admin closure to let this AFD ride through the process (I'd co-nom, if that is necessary) or should we wait a week and I'll relist it at that time? Thanks. JRP ( talk) 13:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I should make the point it's 3021, T.A. :P Sceptre ( talk) 12:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I highly encourage you to revert your edit purporting to close the AfD for Criticism of George W. Bush. JustGettingItRight ( talk) 15:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Non-administrators may close a nomination as "speedy keep" if there is no doubt that such action is appropriate. Otherwise, non-admins are encouraged to recommend a "speedy keep" in the body of the discussion, and allow an administrator to take the decision.